• cmrn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    EDIT: The article has been updated and it was described as a “packaging bug” and not an intended change.

    How many times do I need to pack up and move to the next “best option”

      • doktormerlin@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        That’s far from the best option. It’s working, but it’s super complicated compared to Bitwarden and other cloud password managers. Imagine telling your grandma “just use keepass”, she would never be able to make it work. But Bitwarden? Lastpass? That’s possible

    • JustARaccoon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Sadly as many times as needed, complacency is how these companies get “loyal customers” who are willing to put up with bs

  • unskilled5117@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    This is an important issue IMO that needs to be addressed and the official response by Bitwardens CTO fails to do so.

    There is not even a reason provided why such a proprietary license is deemed necessary for the SDK. Furthermore this wasn’t proactively communicated but noticed by users. The locking of the Github Issue indicates that discussion isn’t desired and further communication is not to be expected.

    It is a step in the wrong direction after having accepted Venture Capital funding, which already put Bitwardens opensource future in doubt for many users.

    This is another step in the wrong direction for a company that proudly uses the opensource slogan.